Truthout is an indispensable resource for activists, movement leaders and workers everywhere. Please make this work possible with a quick donation.
The Trump administration is revising a visa rule for international students that in part determines how long, and under what conditions, they can stay in the country. The change sounds technical. Its effects are not.
Beginning Sept. 15, 2026, most students entering the U.S. on F-1 and J-1 visas – meaning visas for international students and exchange visitors, including students and scholars – will no longer be admitted for “duration of status.” Duration of status means they can remain in the U.S. as long they are enrolled in their academic program, or shortly thereafter.
Now, academic visa holders will instead be able to stay in the country for a predetermined period of time, generally four years.
Those who need more time to complete a degree will have to reapply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for permission to stay.
The change could also complicate international travel: Students returning to the U.S. will have to make sure their fixed period of admission has not expired, in addition to having the valid visa and school documents normally required for reentry.
The rule also lets full-time international students stay 30 days in the country after they complete their program, as opposed to the 60 days they currently have to remain in the U.S.
I study the history of international students in U.S. higher education. Universities rely on international students for tuition, teaching, research and other kinds of skilled work.
These new rules will make it harder for some international students to visit and stay in the country, a result that will likely have negative consequences for universities and colleges, too.
A Look at International Students
U.S. colleges and universities hosted 1,177,766 international students in the 2024-25 school year, an all-time high that made up approximately 6% of all higher education students.
Most of them were working toward degrees in in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.
Nearly 488,500 of those international students were seeking graduate degrees. More than 294,000 of them participated in a federal program called Optional Practical Training, which helps some international students work in jobs related to their field of study before or after they graduate.
International enrollment grew steadily at U.S. colleges and universities, from about 565,000 students in the 2004-05 school year to more than 1 million by the 2015-16 academic year.
Growth then slowed during the first Trump administration but began rising again after 2021.
The concentration is much higher in some programs and institutions. At Purdue, for example, international students make up 63% of graduate students in mechanical engineering. At Columbia University, non-U.S. residents made up 53% of graduate students in the fall of 2024.
Since 2024, the greatest number of international students has come from India. The next largest group is students from China. For more than a decade, students from China made up the largest group of international students in the U.S. But the number of Chinese students has dropped over the past several years.
International students are important for university finances, too.
Most of these students are not eligible for U.S. federal student aid or loans.
More than half of international students report “personal or family funds” as their primary source of financial support to help pay for their education. These students contributed nearly US$55 billion to the U.S. economy in 2024, according to the international student exchange nonprofit Institute of International Education.
International graduate students also frequently teach undergraduate courses, conduct experiments and staff research laboratories.
What the Rule Changes
Until now, most international students did not have to reapply to maintain or extend their standard F-1 student visa midway through their course of study.
And if a student remained enrolled and complied with immigration rules, a university could extend the student’s expected completion date of their program when more time was needed.
The new rule introduces a separate federal immigration review for every student whose course of study goes beyond four years. This, according to the Department of Homeland Security, will add 393,500 new visa reviews to the U.S. government workload each year.
Not a Strict Timeline
Academic work does not always proceed on schedule. Research changes direction. Funding gets delayed. A dissertation needs another semester.
If a student reaches the end of their visa’s limits before they finish their degree, a university can still say that the student is making appropriate progress and needs more time – but now the U.S. government will also have to agree that the student can remain enrolled and stay in the country.
The Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration is among the higher education groups that has warned the change could disrupt teaching and research, as well as discourage students from choosing a U.S. school altogether.
The Department of Homeland Security has acknowledged that the change may be disruptive. But the agency argues that fixed student visa time periods will give immigration officials more opportunities to check whether students are following visa requirements and to conduct national security screening.
A Broader Campaign
The first Trump administration proposed a similar policy in 2020. The Biden administration withdrew this visa proposal in 2021. Trump then revived the proposal after returning to office.
This policy change comes alongside other immigration changes that make it harder for international students to attend U.S. schools.
In 2025, the Trump White House tried unsuccessfully to stop Harvard from enrolling any international students. Federal courts blocked that measure in June 2025.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio also announced in May 2025 that the State Department was beginning to revoke visas of some Chinese students and increasing the scrutiny of prospective international students from China and Hong Kong.
The administration said in January 2026 that it had revoked 8,000 student visas since the start of Trump’s second term.
Why It Matters
The new rule does not end international education or impose a four-year maximum on all students’ degrees. It does mean, however, that more international students will need to get additional levels of federal approval so they can complete their education in the U.S.
A student in a six-year doctoral program can still finish their degree, but they will generally need federal approval to remain in the country beyond four years. A student in a two-year master’s program who finishes on schedule may never need an extension.
The four-year limit can also affect students whose programs are designed to take longer. The University of Cincinnati’s engineering degree generally takes five years to complete, for example. Some medical residency and fellowship pathways for J-1 physicians routinely extend five to seven years.
These new roadblocks can determine whether students finish degrees, or remain with their partners and children. They can also determine whether laboratories keep researchers and employers retain graduates trained in the U.S.
On Aug. 18, a coalition of higher education groups and unions sued to block the rule, arguing that requiring students to repeatedly seek federal permission to continue their studies will disrupt degree programs and make it harder for universities to recruit and retain students.
International students are woven into the everyday work of U.S. higher education. Making their ability to stay more dependent on repeated federal decisions will inevitably affect the institutions that rely on them.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
An important fundraising appeal: We still need to raise $9,000
Truthout is one of only a few platforms for justice-oriented, grassroots journalism. Today, as political censorship from the right intensifies, we have no choice but to ask for your help.
We are fundraising right now to cover our basic operating expenses. If you can support Truthout with a one-time or monthly donation, you will make a significant impact on our work. Anything you can do makes a difference — we appreciate your support.
Facts Only
* Most students entering the U.S. on F-1 and J-1 visas will no longer be admitted for “duration of status.”
* Duration of status means remaining in the U.S. as long as enrolled in their academic program or shortly thereafter.
* Academic visa holders will instead be able to stay in the country for a predetermined period, generally four years.
* Students needing more time must reapply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for permission to stay.
* Full-time international students can stay 30 days after completing their program, versus the current 60 days.
* The change introduces a separate federal immigration review for students whose course of study goes beyond four years.
* One student in a six-year doctoral program can still finish their degree but will need federal approval to remain beyond four years.
* The Department of Homeland Security argues fixed time periods allow officials more opportunities to check visa requirements and conduct screening.
* U.S. colleges hosted 1,177,766 international students in the 2024-25 school year.
* Nearly 488,500 of international students sought graduate degrees.
* International students contributed nearly US$55 billion to the U.S. economy in 2024.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The introduction of mandatory federal immigration reviews for students exceeding four years creates a significant administrative burden, shifting the responsibility for duration management from the university to federal immigration enforcement. This structure fundamentally alters the relationship between academic progress and legal residency, creating an unavoidable tension between institutional goals (completing degrees) and federal security protocols. The argument that this complexity will negatively impact universities and colleges arises from the fact that institutions rely on international students for tuition and workforce development; therefore, embedding external, unpredictable federal review processes directly challenges the stability required for long-term academic planning and recruitment strategies.
The pattern observed is a framing of logistical uncertainty as a threat to institutional stability. The narrative shifts focus from educational mission to regulatory compliance, suggesting that the system prioritizes surveillance over facilitation. The implication is that institutions built around fostering international exchange may face increased friction if the mechanisms for student stay become overtly contingent upon repeated federal adjudication rather than established academic progression. A critical question arises: If administrative delays are built into the process, how does this impact the long-term investment calculus for students and the risk assessment for educational institutions? Furthermore, the underlying tension suggests a broader pattern where policies impacting mobility in higher education intersect with national security concerns, potentially prioritizing control over the fluidity of global academic exchange.
Bridge Questions: How can institutional goals be reliably integrated into regulatory frameworks that emphasize security screening without impeding the necessary flexibility for academic progression? What are the long-term economic consequences for institutions that rely on international student pipelines if the ability to remain in the country is subject to variable federal approval? What alternative governance structures could mitigate the current tension between immigration control and educational mobility?